Property Tax Appeal Board Decision 2004-24116-R-1 Raack

              (Continued on Next Page)
Based on the facts and exhibits presented, the Property Tax
Appeal Board hereby finds no change in the assessment of the
property as established by the Cook County Board of Review is
warranted. The correct assessed valuation of the property is:
LAND: $ 6,264
IMPR.: $ 18,831
TOTAL: $ 25,095
Subject only to the State multiplier as applicable.
PTAB/BRW
1 of 5
PROPERTY TAX APPEAL BOARD'S DECISION
APPELLANT: Edward Raack
DOCKET NO.: 04-24116.001-R-1
PARCEL NO.: 09-17-313-009-0000
The parties of record before the Property Tax Appeal Board are
Edward Raack, the appellant, by attorney Rusty A. Payton of the
Law Offices of Rusty A. Payton, P.C., Chicago, Illinois; and the
Cook County Board of Review.
The subject property is a 53-year old, one and one-half story
frame and masonry dwelling containing 1,523 square feet of living
area with a full, unfinished basement, central air conditioning,
and a one and one-half car garage. According to the appellant,
the dwelling contains 864 square feet of living area.
The appellant submitted evidence before the Property Tax Appeal
Board claiming unequal treatment in the assessment process as the
basis of the appeal. In support of the equity argument, the
appellant submitted a grid analysis detailing four suggested
comparable properties but did not include a photograph of the
subject property. On the appellant's map, the comparables are
located approximately one-half to one mile from the subject. The
comparables are one-story frame and masonry dwellings that are 53
to 81 years old. Two comparables have unfinished basements, and
two do not have basements. One comparable has central air
conditioning, and another has a fireplace. The dwellings have
living areas that contain 840 to 999 square feet, and their
improvement assessments range from $17.30 to $18.35 per square
foot. The subject property has an improvement assessment of
$21.80 per square foot based on 864 square feet of living area;
however, no evidence in the record supports that square footage.
Based on this evidence, the appellant requested a reduction in
the subject's improvement assessment.
The board of review submitted its "Board of Review Notes on
Appeal" wherein the subject's assessment was disclosed. In